Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The European Commission promised to assume a mediator role in the ongoing diplomatic dispute between Slovakia, Hungary, and Ukraine, following the latter’s decision to halt pipeline oil transit from the Russian private company Lukoil through its territory. Now, however, it has chosen to step aside and allow Kyiv to continue endangering the energy security of the two EU member states—despite it arguably violating the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and jeopardizing its entire accession process.

As we reported last month, Kyiv unilaterally placed sanctions on Lukoil, the largest non-state-owned energy firm in Russia, halting all its pipeline oil exports through the territory of Ukraine. The move was surprising, given the company’s relatively good standing around Europe, as well as its distance from the Kremlin and critical stance toward Russia’s war in general. (Its former chairman is suspected to have been murdered because of his Putin-skepticism).

The fallout from the Ukrainian sanction hit Slovakia and Hungary the hardest, both of which—being landlocked—rely on Lukoil for a significant portion of their crude oil supply coming through the Druzhba pipeline (40% and 35%, respectively). The EU introduced a general embargo on Russian oil after the invasion, with Slovakia and Hungary (along with Czechia) granted an opt-out for pipeline oil by Brussels in recognition of this need to maintain their energy security.

After the two countries pointed out that endangering EU member states’ energy security violates the Association Agreement that Ukraine signed with the EU in 2014, the European Commission agreed to mediate and help find a solution acceptable to both—as required by the agreement.

However, after less than two weeks when Kyiv announced it would not lift the sanctions on Lukoil, the Commission immediately stepped aside and told Budapest and Bratislava that it didn’t think their energy security was in any serious danger. In his letter, Commission VP Valdis Dombrovskis of Latvia even suggested the beleaguered Visegrad countries use Croatia as an alternative transit country to Ukraine, if they are still concerned.

“This is a scandal!” Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó wrote in response a day later on Tuesday, August 2nd. Pointing out the probable political bias behind the Commission’s decision, Szijjártó noted:

The letter from the Vice President proves that Ukrainians can do whatever they want against EU member states, particularly those that are pro-peace and do not send weapons.

The minister then went on to explain why the Druzhba pipeline cannot be substituted with an alternative pipeline. “Croatia is simply not a reliable transit country. Since the war broke out, they have raised transit fees to five times the market average. They have made it impossible for MOL to secure long-term transport capacities. Moreover, they have not invested in necessary capacity increases, and the maximum capacity data they provide has never been verified,” Szijjártó wrote.

The fact that Zagreb began to promote its pipeline in the EU Council at the same time the Commission snubbed Budapest and Bratislava suggests some level of Brussels-led background cooperation, he added.

“The suspension of oil supplies from the east would make Hungary and Slovakia completely vulnerable to an unreliable transit country,” Szijjártó explained.

A few days prior, when it started to become apparent that the Commission didn’t intend to fulfill its promise and obligations under the Association Agreement, Szijjártó speculated that the reason might be even more sinister than just regular incompetence.

“There are two options,” he wrote in a statement.

The EU Commission is [either] too weak that it is unable to assert the fundamental interests of member states against a candidate, [or] the whole thing was conceived not in Kyiv but in Brussels, not by the Ukrainian government but the EU Commission, to blackmail the two pro-peace countries refusing to supply weapons.

Either way, chief European commissioner Ursula von der Leyen has some explaining to do, and “immediately,” the minister added.

Original article: europeanconservative